Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Bolton's Debt Reduction


Recommended Posts

  • Site Supporter

SSN have just stated that the club has reduced its 'retained debt' by ?9.3M to just over ?26M. Not sure what this means exactly, but considering the financial discussions in other threads, it prehaps shows the direction the club is heading.

Can't help reading into this that any transfer funds would have to be generated by further player sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would expect to see a healthy business showing retained earnings on its balance sheet. Retained earnings are then usually used for capital expenditure and the like.

 

We show retained debt - I'm guessing this doesn't need further explanation.

 

However, the fact that it is reducing is a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSN have just stated that the club has reduced its 'retained debt' by ?9.3M to just over ?26M. Not sure what this means exactly, but considering the financial discussions in other threads, it prehaps shows the direction the club is heading.

Can't help reading into this that any transfer funds would have to be generated by further player sales.

 

Think it means we lost 35.3 last year and this year we lost a further 26 million this year thats a whopping 61.3 million loss in 2 years I think Eddie Davies better go back to selling some more kettles. :)

Edited by Mounts Kipper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think it means we lost 35.3 last year and this year we lost a further 26 million this year thats a whopping 61.3 million loss in 2 years I think Eddie Davies better go back to selling some more kettles. :)

 

I think the kettle markets reached boiling point tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think it means we lost 35.3 last year and this year we lost a further 26 million this year thats a whopping 61.3 million loss in 2 years I think Eddie Davies better go back to selling some more kettles. :)

 

I must admit that I have not heard the term retained debt before but I am sure that what it refers to is more what DBP says. Our Operating loss was 35 mill last year and this can be shown as a kind of accounting accrual (not exactly cash). A reduction to 26 mill would suggest our accruals (or losses carried forward) have changed (positively) by 9 mill so the total losses carried forward is 26 mill from the previous year ...

 

The 85 mill owed to Ted is entirely separate and is basically how the business is financed. That is, Ted has lent us 85 mill and so this is what we still owe him and that plus some small bank loans makes up the total debt of 90 mill plus.

Edited by Globetrotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would expect to see a healthy business showing retained earnings on its balance sheet. Retained earnings are then usually used for capital expenditure and the like.

 

We show retained debt - I'm guessing this doesn't need further explanation.

 

However, the fact that it is reducing is a good sign.

 

What you are saying is correct but I'm not sure that is what retained debt refers to you are referring to retained profits or losses but if we have reduced our retained losses then it must mean we made a profit what is more likely is that outstanding debt which capital repayments have no bearing on the profit & loss of the business have reduced again meaning a better balance sheet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you are saying is correct but I'm not sure that is what retained debt refers to you are referring to retained profits or losses but if we have reduced our retained losses then it must mean we made a profit what is more likely is that outstanding debt which capital repayments have no bearing on the profit & loss of the business have reduced again meaning a better balance sheet.

 

If you make an actual profit you would have to pay tax on it so the accountants call it something else. From what I can see you are correct, we made ?9m and used it to pay down our debts.

 

10 more years like that and we will be debt free, almost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you make an actual profit you would have to pay tax on it so the accountants call it something else. From what I can see you are correct, we made ?9m and used it to pay down our debts.

 

10 more years like that and we will be debt free, almost.

 

 

 

if we stick with coyle, 10 years time we will be non league

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you make an actual profit you would have to pay tax on it so the accountants call it something else. From what I can see you are correct, we made ?9m and used it to pay down our debts.

 

10 more years like that and we will be debt free, almost.

 

I'd be pleasantly surpised if we have made an actual operating profit of 9 million. More likely an accrual adjustment I would think, some cash came in that we wrote off or we did not have to pay for something that we had allowed for - maybe some of it Meggo's salary that we allowed for etc.

 

I thought we are only paying interest on our main debt with the kettle man? If so, it cant be the main debt reduction.

 

Be interesting to see anyway ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you make an actual profit you would have to pay tax on it so the accountants call it something else. From what I can see you are correct, we made ?9m and used it to pay down our debts.

 

10 more years like that and we will be debt free, almost.

 

Havign not seen the accounts but If we made a ?9m profit then it does mean our retained losses (or retained debts as they refer to) have reduced to an accumulated figure since incorporation of ?26m that has no bearing whatsoever on what we owe eddie or the bank retained losses and debt (loans) due to creditors are completely different.

 

It highlights the fact last year and ?35m loss was due to exceptional items

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.